League of Legends Wiki:Request for Moderator/Dysrhythmia
ability to block vandals, delete pages and delete comments would be helpful. no abuse, promiz :3 Support # 02:44, 12/8/2011 # --Constantly Confuddled Sth 22:44, December 8, 2011 (UTC) # I'm with you! Dah' Blob 08:13, December 9, 2011 (UTC) # You have my vote :) Make us proud! Reilock 13:00 December 9 2011 (UTC) # 23:30, December 9, 2011 (UTC) # がんばって，俺の友達！Lesanthosxia ❦零亜のレスサントスシア❦ 14:47, December 12, 2011 (UTC) Neutral # I'm little torn. I want to support you, but in the same time I feel it's too soon™. You have a nice record on main edits(nice contribution!), commented plenty on pages(community involvement), and has done a fine job on finding vandalism. My only main issue is that you're rushing TOO fast. From when you made this request, it hasn't even been ten days from your last promotion. Which to be honest isn't really a big deal, but it IS something to think about. If you do pass, make this wiki proud. :) Oppose # Rushed advancement. Seems like absolutely everyone wants to be a mod these days. I believe that your belief in what a moderator does is somewhat skewed. The informality in your request is somewhat off-putting, as well as the fact that you made the request almost immediately after achieving rollback. The position isn't about power, bragging or anything: You are a volunteer. Moderator tools shouldn't be casually be requested. Then again, you'll still become Moderator, since just about anyone can be one nowadays. Anyway, just remember: When you DO become mod, just try to make sure that you understand the responsibility the position entails. # Sorry, but despite having a sizable edit volume, you have far too poor Wiki etiquette for me to support you being in a position of power. A general lack of professionalism (start using punctuation and stop using smileys in edit summaries!) has lowered my opinion of your work. Also, this edit in particular made it out as if that Anonymous User called you a retard, which is unacceptable behaviour on your part. LionsLight 05:49, December 15, 2011 (UTC) Comments *Looks like the community supports the nomination :D 04:10, 12/9/2011 * If you get promoted, you should try to use edit summaries more often when there aren't automated summaries (e.g. when editing instead of doing rollbacks, deleting and moving). LionsLight 07:50, December 9, 2011 (UTC) ::don't see how it relates to moderator rights, but yeah, i'll try harder. :::Position of power, comes with the responsibility of setting an example. Using edit summaries is good practice for any Wiki user due to the extra ease of using and History pages. LionsLight 18:22, December 9, 2011 (UTC) ::::Edit summaries are super-helpful, indeed, helps some of us keep track of things, and can be used to explain why something was reverted, removed, edited, etc., so as to keep it from happening again. --Constantly Confuddled Sth 19:58, December 9, 2011 (UTC) ::::yeah sorry, i get that, was just wondering why it was only in the case i got promoted. i'll try to use it more either way, just thought no one cared since no one seems to use it much (supports your point i suppose .w.). thanks for the feedback, by the way. c: :::::I'm not trying to single you out, but it just so happens you're the first Request for Mod I've commented on. LionsLight 01:09, December 10, 2011 (UTC) ::::::yeah, i know; by "why it was only in the case i got promoted" i meant why you put the specific condition that it was only if it succeeded, not why you only brought it up in my nomination. sorry if my poor english is confusing. :::::::Put very bluntly, I don't expect Chat Mods to make editing a primary concern, while I expect Moderators to make it their focus. As long as someone's not Rollback or higher, experience tells me they're unlikely to use edit summaries anyway. LionsLight 01:41, December 10, 2011 (UTC) *It doesn't really relate to mod rights, but it is an important thing for any member of the community to be doing. 23:32, December 9, 2011 (UTC) *I also like to put out that DeadlySnowball who has not been here for quite some time is going to be back pretty soon, so we'll be having more mods on. :) :*As long as they're trusted and could use the rights, they deserve the rights. There isn't exactly "too many mods" type of deal here. 00:28, 12/10/2011 :*well, he said in a few weeks. not very soon imo. :*And you didn't give any words? That's ice cold. :( :*;w; *I do hope you take this seriously, Dys. There are plenty of time to be silly, but this isn't one. :*I don't see how she hasn't taken this seriously. 21:04, 12/10/2011 * "ability to block vandals, delete pages and delete comments would be helpful. no abuse, promiz :3 " When faced with a serious request like this, it's generally useful to show good grammar, extensive reasoning, and no emoticons/bad spelling. It makes the process look like a joke. :*She said "sorry if my poor english is confusing." 00:34, 12/11/2011 :*Not sure how emoticons are a part of English, but sure go ahead. What she wrote looks like she did this on a whim. It doesn't say anything about what she'll do besides not abusing it. Her response is like a child asking for a toy. Toys, games, and stuff would be fun! I promise I won't break it! :D. Yeah, I don't buy her seriousness. ::*Moderator isn't even a big deal. Whether she is serious or not, I'm sure she wouldn't request it for no reason. I suggest you take a look at a previous bureaucrat nomination a while ago, the nominee nominated himself with 2 words. 05:10, 12/11/2011 ::*So you agree that she wasn't serious? As for bureaucrats nominations, I only see three. And none of them seem to have the person nominated themselves. :::*No there's more than three. You can decide things for yourself I believe regarding the seriousness of this nomination. 06:37, 12/11/2011 :::*Oh yeah, I forgot to include yours. But with aj, it was someone else who nominated him. I'm sure if he nominated himself, he'll add more to it(instead of 'I accidentally stuff'). Neon had you nominating him, which I have to say was a nice read. And Nystus' was trololol that went unsuccessful. I have not found a nominee who nominated himself as you claim. But if he/she did. Can you at least give me the link in the first place? I don't want to be this bad guy who doesn't want someone joining the ranks. I really want to be persuade into supporting this, but so far it is actually making me want to oppose it now. ::::*Nystus nominated himself. 17:58, 12/11/2011 ::::*my mistake, i had the silly idea that it was going to be evaluated based on people's actual experiences with me, rather than whether the intro included an emoticon. i also thought "ability to block vandals, delete pages and delete comments would be helpful" made it pretty clear what i intend to use the rights for. is there something significant information i'm missing that you would like to know? :::::*Nothing is wrong with your request. The fact that it is being made into a big deal is discouraging. 22:00, 12/11/2011 * I'd just like to add that Dys may not have approached this position with a professional manner, but she deserves the rights for the following: She is active, she could help at times most of us can't since she lives in England and is on at times most of us aren't, she is truly against vandalism, and she is trusted. 23:40, 12/15/2011 ::You might want to append that reason to the you made up there. LionsLight 09:58, December 16, 2011 (UTC) Closing Statement * As much as I'd like to close this as successful, there is no consensus here to do so. I'd recommend that the candidate work on their spelling and grammar, and come back to RfP in a few months :) 18:23, December 16, 2011 (UTC) **Grammar* xP 23:17, 12/16/2011 ***Thanks, lack of spellcheck makes me grr 23:18, December 16, 2011 (UTC) Category:Inactive rights requests